World Hunger

Lord Judd: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What action they are taking to help ensure that the 1996 target of halving world hunger by 2015 is met.

Baroness Amos: The importance of the 1996 target was reaffirmed in the Millennium Summit declaration. The millennium development goals are at the centre of our work in fighting poverty and hunger. In the millennium declaration the international community explicitly linked hunger with the global poverty target. Transforming this commitment into action means tackling poverty and its root causes—and making sure that food security and nutrition concerns are integrated into poverty reduction processes.
	The Department for International Development is responsible for leading the UK Government's contribution to achievement of the millennium goals. A wide range of actions implemented by DfID and described in the departmental report for 2002 help ensure that the hunger target is met. These include promoting broad economic growth; better education, health and social protection; revitalising agriculture; and working to assure improved governance, peace and democracy. They have produced two key documents, one on the subject of Eliminating Hunger and a consultation paper on the role of agriculture in poverty reduction. The development community has recognised these as important contributions to the policy debate. The department worked to influence the negotiation of the World Food Summit declaration in line with this analysis and will be following through at WSSD.
	But progress towards the hunger targets is too slow. In many countries the number of hungry people in increasing. The international community urgently needs to reconsider its approaches and policies to tackle hunger if we are to meet the global hunger target. We attach importance to the role of trade liberalisation in helping to achieve food security for all. Tackling hunger will require significant progress in the opening up of access to agricultural markets, particularly by developed countries. We want to see substantial cuts by developed countries in agricultural support that distorts trade. We are pushing for large reductions in all forms of export subsidies and the untying of food aid from agricultural surpluses in developed countries. And we are helping to build capacity in developing countries to negotiate and engage with international processes such as the Doha Development Round.
	We are one of the largest providers of extra-budgetary funds to the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations. We are also a significant contributor to the international agricultural research system that underpins productivity increases by poor farmers in developing countries.
	In our work with developing countries we are highlighting areas where greater efforts are needed to eliminate hunger. These include ensuring that poverty reduction strategies focus on hunger; helping create better domestic policy frameworks for agriculture; increasing access to knowledge from which to make informed decisions about technology choice; generating better responses for coping with conflict and natural disasters; developing social protection mechanisms to provide a safety net for the most vulnerable; and improving capacity to assess food insecurity so that we can identify who is vulnerable and why.
	The paper Eliminating Hunger, together with DfID's 2002 departmental report, will be placed in the Library of the House.

Race Directive

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, when implementing the European Union Race Directive in United Kingdom legislation, they intend to provide that the directive's provisions apply to indirect discrimination based on nationality as well as to indirect discrimination based on race and ethnicity.

Lord Filkin: Implementing the EC Article 13 Race Directive will involve making a number of amendments to the Race Relations Act 1976, including amending the existing definition of indirect discrimination.
	We are considering views which we received about this and other issues in the light of the proposals we set out in our public consultation document Towards Equality and Diversity. More detailed proposals will be published in the autumn.

Trafficking People

Lord Alton of Liverpool: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether it is their intention to amend Schedule 2, paragraph 3, of the Proceeds of Crime Bill (people trafficking) when the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Bill is enacted to incorporate the new offence of people trafficking as defined in that Bill.

Lord Filkin: It is our intention to ensure that the offence in the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Bill of trafficking people for the purpose of controlling them in prostitution is added to Schedule 2, paragraph 3 of the Proceeds of Crime Bill.

Trafficking People

Lord Beaumont of Whitley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans they have to provide support and assistance to victims of trafficking as outlined in Article 6 of the United Nations Protocol on Trafficking with regard to making available legal, social and other support services to trafficked women working in the sex industry.

Lord Filkin: The United Kingdom was one of the first countries to sign the United Nations Convention on Transnational Organised Crime (UNTOC) Protocol on the trafficking of human beings and is fully committed to implementing its measures.
	We set out in the White Paper Secure Borders, Safe Haven: Integration with Diversity in Modern Britain that we are committed to offering the victims of trafficking particular support so that they can escape their circumstances and, in certain cases, help law enforcement against organised criminals. Where they are willing to come forward to the authorities we shall make special arrangements for their protection. We will also consider whether it would be appropriate to allow them to remain here.
	Where they are to return home, we will assist them to do so, providing them with initial counselling, ensuring that they have suitable accommodation to return to and providing help to enable them to reintegrate into their own community and find employment.
	We are currently discussing with the voluntary sector the best way of providing protection and support services for the victims of trafficking.

Trafficking People

Lord Beaumont of Whitley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans they have to allow a "reflection delay" prior to the deportation of trafficked women as outlined in the European Commission discussion paper for a directive on short-term permits to stay granted to the victims of trafficking.

Lord Filkin: Arrangements already exist which enable the police to ask for someone subject to immigration control to be allowed to enter or remain in the United Kingdom where this would assist in the investigation of organised crime. These arrangements would permit a period of reflection but they are not offered automatically.
	The United Kingdom view is that these arrangements are best considered on a case-by-case basis and that a blanket category of treatment is not the way forward. Any blanket grant is open to abuse and may create a perverse incentive for traffickers to exploit more victims by suggesting that they will be granted automatic reflection delays if they are trafficked.

European Arrest Warrant

Lord Stoddart of Swindon: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether and how they reconcile the assurances given by Lord Rooker on 23 April during the debate on the report of the EUC on the European arrest warrant that primary legislation would be necessary before the introduction of the measure (HL Deb, cols. 230–32) with their agreement to the proposals on 13 June in the Justice and Home Affairs Committee of the European Union.

Lord Filkin: The framework decision on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between member states were adopted at the Justice and Home Affair (JHA) Council on 13 June, following the lifting of all the remaining parliamentary scrutiny reserves.
	The European arrest warrant will come into operation only if the Bill to give effect to it is approved by Parliament.

Extradition

Lord Stone of Blackheath: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans they have to improve the UK extradition laws.

Lord Filkin: At present it takes too long to extradite someone from the United Kingdom. Not only is this against the interests of justice and the victims of crime but it is the British taxpayer that foots the bill: paying for the fugitive to be detained and often funding their legal battle.
	The previous Home Secretary launched a review of extradition law and the Home Office published proposals for consultation in March last year. Since then the attacks on 11 September have added impetus to European Union (EU) plans for an EU-wide arrest warrant.
	The Government have already announced that we intend to legislate to bring this into effect. This will dramatically speed up the extradition process between EU states but not at the expense of fugitives' rights.
	It should also make it possible in some circumstances to return people to the United Kingdom who, under the old system, would not have been extradited.
	We also plan to streamline procedures for non-EU countries too.
	We are today publishing a consultation paper containing a draft Extradition Bill which outlines our proposals and invites all of those with an interest to comment.
	An Extradition Bill will be introduced when parliamentary time allows.

Dome Site

Viscount Astor: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they expect Engish Partnerships to receive payments for development of the Dome site.

Lord Rooker: English Partnerships will receive payments for the development of its land on the Greenwich peninsula at the point when legal ownership of the site transfers from EP. Ownership will transfer on a plot by plot basis over the lifetime of the joint venture with Meridian Delta Limited (MDL) and will occur only after MDL has spent substantial sums on planning, marketing and installation of the infrastructure needed to support the redevelopment of the peninsula. Payments for the Dome itself will take the form of a share of profits, to be paid once the Dome is re-opened to the public. The precise timing of all these payments depends on when planning permission is granted and the precise phasing of development.

China: Visit of Mr Li Ruihuan

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What human rights concerns they raised in the discussions with Mr Li Ruihuan, Chairman of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, during his recent visit to the United Kingdom; and with what results.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: My noble and learned friend the Lord Chancellor raised a number of issues of current concern, including freedom of speech, Tibet and the need for dialogue with the Dalai Lama, Falun Gong, and the use of the death penalty. Mr Li replied along standard lines.

Steel Industry

Lord Jones: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What they have done to assist the United Kingdom steel industry to face up to the United States' protectionist measures.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The Government fully support the European Commission's robust response in immediately pursuing WTO action and took a lead in pressing for EU safeguard action to protect the UK and EU steel industry against diversion of trade.
	We are also actively supporting UK companies in their efforts to secure product exclusions from the US measures.

Azerbaijan: Displaced Persons

Lord Alton of Liverpool: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What assistance they are providing to agencies working with internally displaced persons in Azerbaijan.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The Department for International Development began providing support to refugee programmes in Azerbaijan in 1999. Financial commitments of £119,500 and £89,000 were made to Oxfam and the Red Cross respectively in that year. A further grant of £70,000 was made to Oxfam in 2000, followed later that year by a grant of £240,000 to UNFPA, whose programme is ongoing. The funds were used to provide basic healthcare and livelihood improvements for refugees living in temporary camps.
	The British Embassy in Baku has funded a project bringing together South Caucasus NGOs to discuss the problems of refugees. The embassy has also funded two projects to provide better education for refugee and internally displaced children.

Ingushetia: Displaced Chechen People

Lord Judd: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What action they are taking bilaterally and multilaterally to seek reassurance that displaced Chechen people in Ingushetia will not be forced by direct or indirect pressure to return to Chechnya against their will and that all resettlement in Chechnya is genuinely voluntary.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: We have not made any recent representations to the Russian authorities about the humanitarian situation in Ingushetia. Our bilateral discussions have instead focused on allegations of human rights violations in Chechnya. We have, however, supported and helped draft an EU demarche to the Russian Government stressing that any return of IDPs from Ingushetia to Chechnya must be fully voluntary and expressed doubt that this is currently realistic given the lack of basic amenities and security guarantees.

Guantanamo Bay

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have recently discussed with the Government of the United States the conditions of prisoners held at Guantanamo in Cuba and the prospects for bringing them to trial or release; and, if so, with what result.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: I refer the noble Lord to the Answer my honourable friend the Member for North Warwickshire gave to my honourable friend the Member for the City of Chester in another place on 13 June (Official Report, col. 1397W). We remain in close touch with the US Government on the legal procedure to which the detainees might be subject.

Afghanistan: Prisoners

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they are discussing with the civil and military authorities in Afghanistan the future of all prisoners held there as a result of military operations.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: We made clear to the Afghan Interim Administration, and will continue to make clear to their successor, the Transitional Administration, that we expect them to respect their international obligations regarding prisoners currently being held in Afghanistan. We remain in regular contact with the International Commiittee of the Red Cross (ICRC), which closely monitors the situation and welfare of all prisoners.

EU: Public Knowledge

Baroness Ludford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What assessment they have made of the level of public knowledge of matters relating to the European Union.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: An opinion poll on public knowledge of, and attitudes to, the European Union was carried out by ICM for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in October 2001. The full results of the poll were published and placed in the Library of the House in December 2001.

Ageing: Report to UN Conference

Lord McColl of Dulwich: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will place in the Library of the House a copy of their report submitted to the United Nations Conference on Ageing.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: My right honourable friend the Minister for Pensions delivered the United Kingdom's national statement at the United Nations Second World Assembly on Ageing held in Madrid from 8 April 2002 to 12 April 2002. A copy has been placed in the Library.

Temporary Veterinary Inspectors

Lord Redesdale: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many temporary veterinary inspectors, while on the Government's temporary register of veterinary surgeons, have been found guilty of unprofessional conduct in each of the last 10 years.

Lord Whitty: As far as can be determined, no temporary veterinary inspectors (TVIs) have been found guilty of unprofessional conduct in each of the last 10 years while holding a TVI appointment.

Foot and Mouth Disease

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Lord Whitty on 2 May (WA 140), whether they are able to state:
	(a) what moneys have already been paid;
	(b) the number of claims that have been received and are still to be processed;
	(c) the number of claims that are now overdue; and
	(d) the length of time each overdue claim has been outstanding.

Lord Whitty: By 24 May 2002 the department had spent £295 million on cleansing and disinfection.
	The accounts of contractors used by Defra during the FMD outbreak to cleanse and disinfect premises have been the subject of detailed examination. It has necessitated Defra obtaining legal advice from a number of external law firms on whether sums claimed by contractors are valid and due.
	Wide-ranging issues have arisen on the accounts. These include legal issues such as matters of contractual interpretation, forensic accountancy issues and evidential issues involving the assessment of both a large amount of documentation and proofing of witnesses. Some of these disputes will inevitably result in court proceedings, although Defra remains committed to resolving matters by mediation where appropriate.
	In these circumstances it is not possible at present for reasons of legal and commercial confidentiality to disclose the number of claims that have been received and are still to be processed; the number of claims that contractors claim are now overdue; and the length of time each allegedly overdue claim has been outstanding.

Foot and Mouth Disease

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Elliot Morley, MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, on 2 May (HC Deb, 938W), whether road haulage contracts for the removal of foot and mouth carcasses in Northumberland were awarded as a result of the competitive tendering process; whether contracts awarded to Snowie were the outcome of the competitive tendering process; how many separate contracts were awarded; and in each case, how many other firms tendered.

Lord Whitty: Pursuant to the Written Answer by Elliot Morley, MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Defra, on 2 May (HC Deb, 938W), a road haulage contact was awarded to Snowie through the use of the negotiated procurement procedure without the prior publication of an official journal (OJEU) notice.
	Separate road haulage contracts were awarded as a result of the competitive tendering process to Banks; Yuill and Dodds; NDMR; Whitkirks; Beverley Ridley; and Blakey's Haulage. In each case a minimum of three to four other firms tendered.
	All contractors' performance was subject to ongoing review and management by quantity surveyors, forensic accountants and other technical specialists retained by Defra.

Foot and Mouth Disease

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the United Kingdom is now a foot and mouth free area; and, if so, when they will lift the current movement restrictions.

Lord Whitty: The UK regained its FMD free status in January this year.
	The interim controls now in place are the result of a precautionary, step-by-step approach. These controls are designed to protect against the rapid spread of any new incursion of disease. They have already been relaxed in a number of ways in response to requests from the livestock industry and we hope to make other adjustments over the summer.
	The interim arrangements are without prejudice to decisions about a permanent movement regime which will be made after more detailed consideration of the recommendations of the Royal Society and Lessons Learned inquiries and full consultation with interested parties during the autumn.

Waste Incineration

Lord Gladwin of Clee: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What action they are taking to implement the Waste Incineration Directive.

Lord Whitty: The Department published on 20 July 2002 a consultation paper that sets out how the Government intend to implement EC Directive 2000/76/EC on the incineration of waste. It is aimed at operators of incineration and co-incineration plant, regulators, waste producers and waste managers, all of whom will be affected by the implementation of that directive. It is also aimed at waste and environmental interest groups which have an interest in environmentally sound regulation.
	The consultation raises a number of issues for consultation and includes a copy of the draft implementing regulations, directions to regulators and an explanatory commentary.
	This consultation is solely about the mechanism to implement the tight controls on emissions from incinerators to which the UK has signed up throughout the passage of the Waste Incineration Directive. These controls embody what was already accepted and largely applied in the UK as good practice. This consultation is not about the place of incineration in waste management strategies. It is about ensuring that incinerators continue to be tightly regulated.

Urban Waste Water Treatment: Sensitive Areas

Lord Harris of Haringey: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What was the outcome of the 2001 review of sensitive areas as required by the Urban Waste Water Treatment (England and Wales) Regulations 1994.

Lord Whitty: Based on recommendations from the Environment Agency, we have reviewed the identification of sensitive areas in England in accordance with the criteria in Part I of Schedule I to the Urban Waste Water Treatment (England and Wales) Regulations 1994 (which transpose the European Council Directive (91/271/EEC) concerning urban waste water treatment.
	This review has resulted in the identification of 33 more water bodies in England as sensitive areas: 32 are because the waters have since the last review in 1997 been found to be eutrophic or may in the near future become eutrophic if protective action is not taken. Eutrophic waters are those which are, or may be, adversely (in terms of their ecology and quality) affected by discharges from sewage treatment works serving communities of more than 10,000 inhabitants.
	The remaining water body, the River Itchen in the Midlands, which supplies drinking water, has been identified on the basis of elevated levels of nitrate under the terms of the regulations.
	Identification of these areas will result in more stringent treatment being provided at 53 qualifying treatment works by water companies. This treatment involves reducing levels of phosphorus and/or nitrogen in discharges to tackle eutrophication and nitrate levels of these waters.
	These new requirements on water companies to remove these nutrients from sewage treatment work discharges will complement and add to the action required by farmers under the Nitrates Directive and by my department on diffuse pollution, which I also announced today.
	Lists of the new sensitive areas have today been deposited in the Libraries of both Houses. Maps showing the location of all current sensitive areas (eutrophic) and (nitrate) will be deposited in the Libraries of both Houses and at offices of the Environment Agency in due course.

Diffuse Pollution of Water by Agriculture

Lord Gregson: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What action is being taken to address diffuse pollution of water by agriculture; and how they intend to implement the Nitrates Directive in England in the light of consultation.

Lord Whitty: One year after the creation of Defra, it gives us enormous pleasure that what were different departments are now working well together to develop an integrated approach to the problems of pollution, and especially diffuse pollution from agriculture.
	The increased intensification of farm production and the great steps made to reduce point source pollution from factories and sewage works mean that, as the Policy Commission on Food and Farming noted, agriculture is now clearly one of the major contributors to the pollution of water. It is also a significant polluter of air.
	Over time we will need to take further steps to reduce pollution from agriculture but in a cost-effective way. We therefore need to involve farmers very closely in continuing work to achieve a cleaner and healthier environment. Many farmers are committed to protecting and enhancing the environment, but much more needs to be done to raise standards across all farms to the standards of the best and to tackle the specific problem of diffuse pollution.
	Over the next few years we will be implementing the EU directives we have signed up to in order to improve water quality. As part of this work, later this year we will be holding a more detailed consultation with all sectors to follow up our first general consultation on implementing the Water Framework Directive.
	Over 70 per cent of nitrates and over 40 per cent of phosphates in English waters originate from agricultural land. Up to a half of England's bathing waters are affected by short-term contamination by agricultural pollution, mainly by microbes from livestock manure being washed off farm land after rain. Excessive loads of fine silt are generated by soil erosion from intensively farmed land. Pesticides are contaminating drinking water sources, requiring expensive additional treatment at water works to remove pesticides before water can be supplied to consumers.
	No one farmer is responsible for this, but cumulatively diffuse pollution from farms is having a substantial impact on the quality of English waters. That is why we have begun a strategic review of diffuse water pollution from agriculture to identify cost-effective policy measures to prevent and control this pollution and to improve the sustainability of agriculture. We are co-ordinating this review with work announced in the Budget to review the particular role that economic instruments could play in tackling such pollution.
	As part of the open approach to policy development that we are seeking to adopt in the new department, I am publishing today a discussion document The Government's Strategic Review of Diffuse Water Pollution From Agriculture in England, so that we can start a debate with farmers and other stakeholders about the problems that we face and how we can best solve them. This marks the beginning of a process for working with stakeholders to develop a package of policy measures to reduce pollution.
	Part of what we need to achieve is improved control of the application of manures and fertilisers to land. Through the review we are considering the full range of policy mechanisms that could play a part in the future in encouraging and assisting farmers to improve their management of manure and nutrients. But we also have to implement some measures now, to comply with the European Court of Justice judgment that we have failed to meet our obligations under the 1991 Nitrates Directive to tackle agricultural nitrate pollution of waters.
	We published proposals for implementing the directive in December 2001. We have carefully considered the responses to the consultation and are today publishing an analysis of these responses. We have decided to apply the minimum regulation consistent with our obligations under the directive, to avoid closing off other options for tackling the wider problem of diffuse pollution that might be identified through the current review.
	We will designate new nitrate vulnerable zones (NVZs) covering 47 per cent of the land area of England, which will take the total designated area in England to 55 per cent. These are areas draining into rivers, ground water and other waters which are affected by nitrate pollution. In consequence, farmers using manufactured nitrogen fertilisers or organic manures will be required to follow an action programme to reduce pollution.
	This action will help to prevent and reverse damaging impacts of eutrophication, and improve the quality of drinking water sources. Better control of manure spreading will also cut microbiological inputs to water, helping to maintain and further increase the quality of bathing waters and shellfish waters.
	The overall extent of the new designations will be less than was originally estimated in the consultation document, as a result of work to define and quantify the NVZ areas more accurately than was possible at the time the consultation document was issued. Some new areas have been added, as was anticipated in the consultation document; but more areas have been removed.
	We are today publishing a revised regulatory impact assessment, which estimates that the compliance costs incurred by farmers will amount to about £20 million per year. Costs will vary considerably from farm to farm, but we acknowledge that some farmers, particularly those who need to construct additional slurry storage facilities, will incur substantial costs. To assist those farmers who are most affected, we will extend the existing Farm Waste Grant Scheme to the new NVZ areas to help finance improvements to slurry storage facilities required to implement the action programme.
	Formal designations setting down the precise boundaries of the new zones will follow as soon as possible, and it will become a legal requirement to follow the action programme from 19 December 2002. By the end of July, Defra will make available detailed interactive maps of the new NVZ areas. As soon as these are available, we will write to farmers to explain how to access these maps. We will also send all farmers in affected areas explanatory guidance material, together with sources of further advice on how to comply with the measures and details on the availability of grant under the Farm Waste Grant Scheme.
	We are also taking action to reduce phosphate and nitrate pollution of waters from other sources and are announcing separately additional designations under the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive that will require water companies to reduce phosphate or nitrate discharges from certain sewage treatment works.
	We are also committed to improving air quality. Eighty five per cent of the ammonia which enters the atmosphere in the UK comes from fertilisers and manures used in agriculture. We will be publishing a booklet later this summer which will explain the problems caused by ammonia emissions to initiate debate on how to tackle this related problem.
	This all adds up to a substantial agenda for change. I recognise that we must secure these changes in ways which maximise the beneficial impact on the environment while minimising the regulatory burden on farmers. As we said in Working Together, we need to explore joined-up ways of working; to develop whole farm approaches; and to identify smarter ways of regulating. For example, several of the measures I have mentioned could affect the ways farmers handle manures and fertilisers, pointing to the benefits of more integrated approaches.

Cabinet Meetings

Lord Campbell of Croy: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have decided to depart from the practice of governments in the past of providing information to the media about meetings of the Cabinet, including when and where the meetings were held and who attended them.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Successive administrations have regarded the ability of Ministers to meet and discuss policy issues in private to be essential for effective decision making. It has therefore never been the practice of governments to publish formal details of Cabinet meetings on a systematic basis.